Council job cuts: it is simply bad planning to cut planning team
We are lucky to live in such a beautiful and historic city in a district that has a rich and historic environment and we were very interested to read the recent article in the Chronicle regarding intended cuts in the planning services section of the council.
The Chronicle is correct in stating that the council has a responsibility for looking after one of the biggest collections of listed building in the country and in drawing to the public's attention the concerns of conservation groups which question the wisdom of the decisions to cut back staff in planning services.
It is extraordinary that when the council has only recently been questioned by UNESCO on their commitment and management of the World Heritage Site they are now looking at cut backs in a service which has a major influence on the future development of the city and in particular control over alterations to its historic fabric. The conservation of the historic environment adds to the cultural value of the city, its economic well being and sustainability, and a key part of Bath's recovery rests on protecting its heritage.
In an economic downturn it is often assumed that heritage stands in the way of recovery but this is not true. It can act as a catalyst for recovery.
The Planning Services section of the council can help in the correct assessment of this valuable asset and in encouraging its wider appreciation, importance and management.
In these days of uncertainty and recession it is sadly and too frequently the Planning Services section of local authorities that suffers the most from the immediate short term policies to cut costs. It seems they are considered to be a low priority and penalised because they are not viewed as good income generators, compared to other areas.
Local authorities should protect their Planning Services section especially if they are going to cope with planning applications after the recession. If applications increase, the planning department will not be able to operate efficiently and this will prevent the council from laying the foundations for economic recovery.
It is short-sighted to cull planning, enforcement, conservation and landscape officers to save money, particularly in a World Heritage Site. This could affect the quality of decisions and may result in increased bills for consultants.
Such drastic cut backs in staff will obviously have serious implications for the efficient running of the service and will result in a poor service for the community. Councillors and cabinet members need to question very carefully the cuts proposed.
The needs for cut backs in Planning Services do not appear to have been considered in a comprehensive manner with other services/departments under the control of the council. This would have helped in providing a clearer picture on where budgets are being spent over a wider area and then decisions could have been considered on where cut backs are appropriate.
Perhaps it was easier to start with Planning Services as they are not a priority service?
Why is the local authority not looking at cut backs at higher management level at the same time as staff at the lower end of the structure?
If the Planning Service is over budget and requires urgent attention what is the reason for this?
The value of the Planning Services section cannot be judged solely in relation to how many applications have been received and the income generated from application fees. There are for example no fees charged for listed building applications but is this work any less important than services which generate income from the council?
Councillor Malcolm Hanney, in his emailed reply to the article on job cuts in the Chronicle, notes that whilst he understands the comments made by the heritage bodies, they have the opportunity to present their views through the budget process and relevant cabinet members.
We hope that heritage bodies and residents of the district will make their concerns regarding the cut backs proposed in Planning Services known to the council and council members as soon as possible.
Finally, the Chronicle has voted Councillor Bryan Chalker as the Politician of the Year and stated that he is a great ambassador for the whole area. Mr Chalker is also the council's historic buildings champion so hopefully he will also be considering supporting conservation bodies and other residents in questioning the wisdom of such drastic cut backs proposed in Planning Services.
MR AND MRS JACOBS Valley View, Bath
Council bosses feel that the only way to save money is to lose potentially some of it's most valuable and effective staff (ie those lower down the ladder and dealing with the day-to-day workings of the council and the many public services provided).
Whilst the loss of some lower level staff is inevitable, they also need to consider taking out layers of ineffective middle to senior management, which I have no doubt must exist. But, of course, that means doing surgery on oneself which no one is likely to do (it is fascinating to see how selfish people's agendas become at these times.)
The financial benefits to be gained due to the higher salaries and benefits commanded by these middle to senior managers would be much more easily attainable with the loss of a lot less people (rather than the potential loss of any public services), and would also force the issue of the need to improve the leadership and management required in a public body during these difficult times.
It is interesting that the planning department appears to have been heavily targeted in this redundancy round, as invariably it is not necessarily the planning of projects that is poor, but it is the decision-making and the implementation of projects that is ineffective – most of which is usually down to middle/senior management.
As a taxpayer I would like to see this public body providing public services much more publicly accountable to improve the decision-making and implementation of projects, and be driven less by personal interests and agendas.
What the council really needs to consider helping it make the right decisions in this redundancy round is:
What are the key value for money services that need to exist in B&NES, and to what levels of performance? This is why the council exists – to provide public services that perform well and provide value for the taxpayers money. We must also recognise those public services that are currently performing very well.
What is the right mix of qualifications, knowledge, skills, experience and resource levels required to provide and manage each service? And who are the right people to fill these roles, both now and for the sustainable future?
The redundancy of lower level staff should not be used to protect poor or incompetent management – a problem that will then persist and cause more grief in the longer term. These difficult times require strong leadership, and dealing with poor or incompetent management is a good test of an organisations leadership capability.
Is B&NES up to the challenge?
S MORRIS Change Management Consultant Peasedown St John
Let's bury our heads in the sand, hope the problem goes away and put off tough decisions to another time.
This is the solution Wansdyke Labour MP Dan Norris has to the financial crisis his Government has got us into.
It beggars belief that last week Mr Norris called on the council to drain its reserves in order to put off the changes that will be necessary when the council is facing the prospect of severe cuts to its grant.
If hard decisions about council staffing levels are simply put off for another day, it will only mean more compulsory redundancies in the future. This cannot be fair on anyone. Not council staff, and not local tax-payers.
Mr Norris and the Labour Party may want the council to follow the Government's example by building up massive deficits and draining its accounts, but voters can see where this approach has left our country: on its knees.
Through careful budget management over recent years, reserve levels have been achieved by the council which are appropriate to the risks it faces.
Residents understand that once the cupboard is bare, any unexpected shortfalls in council income would mean big council tax hikes.
Indeed, if the Conservatives had not prudently set aside a Recession Reserve in last year's council budget, then there would have been no money to cushion increases to parking charges, and no 'Recession Relief Grants' handed to local organisations helping the most vulnerable through this tough period.
Mr Norris may believe that his short-termist approach will gain him votes but voters are not fools.
They can see that the failed economic policies of his beleaguered Labour Government should not be repeated at the local level.
COUNCILLOR GORDON WOOD Conservative, Saltford
Comment on this story